StopPATH WV
  • News
  • StopPATH WV Blog
  • FAQ
  • Events
  • Fundraisers
  • Make a Donation
  • Landowner Resources
  • About PATH
  • Get Involved
  • Commercials
  • Links
  • About Us
  • Contact

Keryn's Adventure in Potomac Edison Land

4/30/2013

2 Comments

 
Alice isn't the only one to find herself tumbling into a rabbit hole where up is down and down is up and nothing is as it seems.

While trying to do a radio program about FirstEnergy's Potomac Edison/Mon Power plant transfer this morning, I found it interesting that every person who called in mentioned Potomac Edison's recent unjust and unreasonable billing practices.  And then I sat down to pay a pile o' bills when I got home and guess what?  There was my Potomac Edison bill.  The company has been urging customers with questions about their bills to call the customer service center, so I did.

Forty minutes later, I still didn't have logical answers to my questions.  I can only imagine how customers who have received astronomical bills they cannot pay must feel after an hour in Potomac Edison's "valued customer" funhouse.

First, I had to verify that I actually was a customer because my name supposedly isn't on the bill.  Now, we know that's just not true, don't we?  I guess that must be a common mistake, right, Randy?

After the first customer service rep. and I determined that the cause of my budget plan billings being inconsistent was Potomac Edison's lack of meter reading over the past year, it was suggested that I begin reading my own meter on those months that Potomac Edison can't make it to my house.  I was assured that Potomac Edison attempts to read meters EVERY MONTH, however they are only required to read them twice a year. 

After being informed that was complete and utter crap, she further insisted that Potomac Edison's WV tariff required only two readings per year and began to argue with me.  When I suggested she check her information with her supervisor, I got dumped onto hold for 29 minutes without explanation.  TWENTY-NINE minutes!  I guess I was supposed to hang up and go away, but I simply turned on the speaker and set the phone on my desk while I tackled the 472 emails that had piled up while I was away.  Oh... and I was highly entertained by Potomac Edison's hold muzak play list, which I have noted to share with you.... song by hysterical song:

You've got a friend


Still the same


Tight rope

Sister golden hair

Carefree highway


Good day sunshine

And here's where it got really hysterical...

How long (has this been going on)

Rocket man (and I think it's gonna be a long, long time)

Operator (could you help me place this call)


And just when I was starting to wonder what was coming next, "the supervisor" picked up the line and was not surprised in the least to find that I had been waiting 29 minutes and no one had bothered to tell her why I was calling.

At least she verified that Potomac Edison is required to read meters every other month according to their WV tariff and that the first customer service rep. was wrong.  I wasn't convinced that the supervisor actually would correct this misconception, however.  I guess it really doesn't matter how much Potomac Edison lies to you when you call for assistance.

However, while also verifying that my inconsistent bills were the product of Potomac Edison failing to read my meter, even she couldn't tell me why my new (APP) Summary only included 4 months while my neighbor's included 12.  Or why last month's bill was much higher for less kwh.  Apparently all my problems will be over if I only read my own meter from now on.  Right.
2 Comments

Your Green Addiction is not Sustainable!

4/25/2013

0 Comments

 
Super-rich billionaire Michael Zilkha believes he's helping the environment by financing "Clean" transmission lines.  But, of course, none of this infrastructure is in his backyard.
The push is on for increased production of Midwest wind and construction of billions of dollars worth of new transmission to ship it to the environmentally superior coastal enclaves of the rich and famous.  These sadly clueless friends of the environment need to wake up and become just as conscious of their "green footprint."

While advocating for increased production and use of renewable power may make you well-heeled "environmentalists" feel good, your green addiction may not be sustainable.

In order for you to trick yourself into believing the lie that you are helping the environment when you flip on your centrally generated and imported "wind power" light switch, you may be denying the true effect of your actions.

Sustainability is defined as: 

"Sustainability is based on a simple principle: Everything that we need for our survival and well-being depends, either directly or indirectly, on our natural environment.  Sustainability creates and maintains the conditions under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony, that permit fulfilling the social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations.

Sustainability is important to making sure that we have and will continue to have,  the water, materials, and resources to protect human health and our environment."


Centrally generated electricity that is shipped hundreds or thousands of miles to end users is not sustainable.  New land based wind turbines take thousands of acres of farmland out of production every year.  What are you going to eat when wind is the Midwest's only crop?  But, at least farming wind is voluntary and those who choose to do so are financially rewarded for their efforts.

New transmission lines proposed to ship this "clean" wind power to market in eastern states also take thousands of acres out of production.  However, farmers forced to sacrifice acreage to transmission lines must settle for one-time pittances under the threat of eminent domain.  Eminent domain is a compulsory sale of property for the common welfare.  The "common welfare" here is improving the green footprint of environmentally conscious easterners who don't want the troublesome burden of wind turbines or transmission lines mucking up their own backyards.  Farmers are forced to bear a huge burden by hosting transmission line after transmission line after transmission line.  How much is one person supposed to bear for another's comfort in the name of societal good?

It's not that easterners can't produce their own renewables.  It's just that they don't want to.  Therefore, they conveniently refuse to see the true impact of importing renewables.

Here's the true impact.  Read it.  Think about it.  Why should these farmers have to sacrifice for your environmental conscience?  Why can't you help yourself?

As a society, we have recognized the concept of social and environmental justice.  The dirty, the troublesome, the inconvenient and ugly infrastructure necessary to maintain our standard of living has been inequitably foisted off onto those less fortunate and powerful.  Just because it's "green" power and not a coal-fired generator, or a chemical factory, does not make it any more acceptable from a social or environmental justice standpoint.  The more fortunate classes are once again expecting others to bear the brunt of sustaining their lifestyle instead of providing for their own needs by hosting their own power producing infrastructure.

An environmental conscience that does not consider sustainability is just a comfortable lie the well-to-do tell themselves.  It's time to take responsibility for your own needs.  We must find better solutions.


0 Comments

Reason for Potomac Edison meter reading and billing failure finally revealed!

4/24/2013

10 Comments

 
It's all Todd's fault!

According to a news story filmed yesterday by WHAG:
Potomac Edison is also renumbering work routes; meaning meter-readers will work in close proximity.

"That way if I finish my route, I can come over and help you finish your route. That should help prevent some estimates on the back-end of your route, where we couldn't get to a customer," says Todd Meyers, Potomac Edison spokesperson.
Well, color me steamed!  I invited Todd to come read my meter last year, and he still hasn't "finished his route" and arrived to do his job.

If you haven't seen Todd at your house either, be sure to contact him and let him know you need him to finish his route:

Todd Meyers
Maryland – Potomac Edison
West Virginia – Mon Power, Potomac Edison
Pennsylvania – West Penn Power
(724) 838-6650
email:  [email protected]

What does Todd mean "help me finish my route?"  I don't have a route!  Is Todd insinuating that I should be reading my own meter from now on, aka "my route?"  But that's what I'm paying you to do, Todd!

I'm also paying you to trim trees and maintain your equipment.  That's not news.  And sadly, yesterday's little drama was just that -- a play staged for the media.  Oh, look at us working today!  Big stinkin' deal!  This hole is much, much deeper than Potomac Edison thinks.

So, what has Todd been doing with the money we've been paying him for years?  Todd has a lot to answer for.  This is all Todd's fault!  Go ahead, give him a call!
10 Comments

Transmission Opposition 101 - Listen Live

4/21/2013

2 Comments

 
Tune in at 10:00 a.m. Eastern on Tuesday morning to hear the hour-long interview we did with WDRT's "Heart of Wellness" radio show.

The interview is a teaser for next weekend's SOUL Wisconsin Energy Action Fair, where we will be speaking.

Hope to see you at the fair!

Missed the show?  Listen to a replay.

Here's another article.

Won't we have fun?

2 Comments

AEP and FirstEnergy Leapfrog Around Copycat Circle

4/21/2013

2 Comments

 
Can't we all just be originals who shine for our own ideas and hard work?  Apparently not when you're one of Ohio's two gigantic investor-owned electric utilities.  AEP and FirstEnergy are so concentrated on copying each other that it's hard to tell when either one of them has an original idea.  I've lost track of how many times the tedious twins have copied each other's ideas lately. 

How about the ol' selling your uncompetitive coal plants into West Virginia's regulated system trick?  This was AEP's idea to save their bacon when FirstEnergy stole a whole bunch of their Ohio customers.  But FirstEnergy has never seen a good idea that they aren't too proud to copy, so FirstEnergy soon found itself short on generation too!  Wow, serendipity!

And how about that rate case TV commercial beat down between the two companies last year?  Freak show!

Now it's AEP's turn to copycat FirstEnergy's sports team sponsorship idea by becoming "the official energy sponsor" of Wrigley Field, home of the Chicago Cubs. 

In typical fashion though, AEP improves on FirstEnergy's ham-handed public relations disaster of epic proportions.  AEP actually does supply the electricity to the sports venue it sponsors!  (FirstEnergy Stadium's electricity is supplied by Cleveland Public Power, not FirstEnergy - cue the irony!) AEP says, "We want all fans throughout Chicagoland to know they have a choice in who supplies their electricity."

Let's hope that none of AEP's executives goes all Chatty Cathy with the media to demonstrate the way these deals get made between the filthy rich, but maybe AEP has a little more class than the buffoons at FirstEnergy.
2 Comments

"Tensions Mount" Over Widespread FirstEnergy "Potomac Edison" Billing Errors

4/19/2013

0 Comments

 
Ut-oh, FirstEnergy. UT-OHHHHHHH!

If I wasn't buried under a mound of your paper, I might have more to say right now, but I did NOT say the quote attributed to me in the article.

The big, uncaring, faceless corporation really ought to be ashamed of itself for the effect it is having on ordinary people who have been surprised with outrageous, inaccurate bills over the past year.

More to come...
0 Comments

Stop Higher Electric Bills on Thursday!

4/16/2013

2 Comments

 
The Jefferson County NAACP will sponsor a public meeting concerning the recent outrageous increase in electric bills, and a proposal to further increase electric rates to purchase a 40-year old coal fired power plant. This meeting will also present information on the potential of energy efficiency to save money on electric bills and create thousands of West Virginia jobs.

The meeting will be held on Thursday, April 18, 7:00pm at the Fishermen Hall located at 300 South West Street in Charles Town. Daniel Chiotos of the Sierra Club and Patience Wait of Stop PATH will be speaking and answering questions.

The local state legislators have been invited to attend and hear the public concerns. If you are unhappy and concerned about your electric and want to prevent another unnecessary rate hike, please come to this meeting so that a message can be sent to the WV Public Service Commission. There will be opportunities to take action at this event.
2 Comments

Maryland Public Service Commission Opens Official Investigation into Potomac Edison Meter Reading and Billing Practices

4/12/2013

0 Comments

 
On April 9, 2013, the Maryland Public Service Commission opened an official investigation into FirstEnergy subsidiary Potomac Edison's meter reading, usage estimation and billing practices.

The Commission hereby initiates an investigation into PE’s meter reading frequency, estimation of bills, and compliance with its Tariff, and delegates this matter to the Public Utility Law Judge Division (“PULJD”) for appropriate proceedings.
The investigation into PE’s meter reading frequency, estimation of bills, and compliance with its Tariff is not limited to the Tufts and Sugarloaf Conservancy Complaints; the PULJD shall determine the full scope of the investigation, and designate additional issues as appropriate. The PULJD shall notify the parties, including the Office of People’s Counsel, of the date and time of a scheduling conference at which deadlines are to be set for, inter alia, PE’s production of documents.  The Commission hereby initiates an investigation into PE’s meter reading frequency, estimation of bills, and compliance with its Tariff, and delegates this matter to the Public Utility Law Judge Division (“PULJD”) for appropriate proceedings.
The investigation into PE’s meter reading frequency, estimation of bills, and compliance with its Tariff is not limited to the Tufts and Sugarloaf Conservancy Complaints; the PULJD shall determine the full scope of the investigation, and designate additional issues as appropriate. The PULJD shall notify the parties, including the Office of People’s Counsel, of the date and time of a scheduling conference at which deadlines are to be set for, inter alia, PE’s production of documents.
The MD-PSC is responding to the complaints of Mr. Richard Tufts and Sugarloaf Conservancy that were filed last year.  It looks like the PSC has heard its consumers loud and clear and has had enough of Potomac Edison's comedy of errors excuses.  Nobody is buying Potomac Edison's lies any more.

I've been circling round this issue in my spare time looking for the company's motivation for this continual incompetence, which coincided with the Allegheny Energy/FirstEnergy merger.  What's in it for FirstEnergy?

Potomac Edison's response to Mr. Tufts' complaint finally explains the game.
For more than thirty years, Potomac Edison's Maryland tariffs have provided that the
Company will read most meters every two months. This practice saves customers money, because fewer meter readers need to be used. For example, in Potomac Edison's last rate case in 1994, the expense filed for meter reading was just under $1.3 million for meter reading; if meters were going to be read every month, that requirement would have had to be significantly higher.

Footnote:  In fact, even with reading every two months instead of monthly, the Company was spending $2.0 million on meter reading (even without taking into consideration the new hires and other recent measures  discussed elsewhere in this response), substantially more than is collected in rates for this function.
Potomac Edison has been losing money on its meter reading function to the tune of $700,000 per year.  This could be easily remedied by filing a new rate case with the Maryland PSC to collect this difference.  However, the filing of a new rate case could also cause Potomac Edison to lose substantially more than $700,000 per year by setting a new rate of return for the company.  The rate of return that the company is allowed to earn on fixed costs in Maryland is currently set at 11.9%, and is the second highest ROE in FirstEnergy's distribution affiliate stable.  If Potomac Edison filed a new rate case, the ROE would be updated and adjusted to today's financial realities.  It is in FirstEnergy's financial interest to continue to collect rates set in the 1993/1994 settlement.  If it were not, the company would file a new rate case.  It has not done so.

The annual loss on meter reading expense compared to the risk to ROE stemming from a new rate case was a loss Allegheny Energy was willing to accept.  But when Allegheny Energy merged with FirstEnergy, apparently that was no longer true.  FirstEnergy wanted the best of both worlds -- collection of the full amount of meter reading costs AND the 1993/94 rate case ROE.  But because FirstEnergy couldn't collect more for meter reading AND maintain an 11.9% ROE, FirstEnergy opted to simply cut the cost of meter reading by slimming down their meter reading staff and not performing scheduled meter readings required by law.  If Potomac Edison cut their meter reading expense to match the amount they were collecting, the loss would stop and the company could keep its 11.9% ROE, having its cake and eating it too!

But now it appears the game is up.  If I were the Maryland PSC, I would require Potomac Edison to issue a refund to customers amounting to the difference between what Potomac Edison spent and what it would have cost to perform meter readings as required by law (around $700K per year, according to Potomac Edison.)  And then, as a punitive measure, I would make them file a new rate case.  :-)  How about it, FirstEnergy?

FirstEnergy has also been pulling the same stunt in other states in which it operates.  West Virginia's ROE is 10.5% and was set in 2007.  Pennsylvania's ROE is 11.5% set in 1994. These jurisdictions are where FirstEnergy affiliates have also been failing to read meters.  Coincidence?  I think not.

West Virginia legislators are not happy with Potomac Edison's excuses.  Could an investigation by the West Virginia PSC also be on the horizon?
0 Comments

US Dept. of Energy Misuses Eminent Domain Authority ForĀ  Clean Line's Private Land Grab

4/10/2013

20 Comments

 
The authority to site and permit high-voltage transmission lines has historically rested with the states.  However, the federal government has been trying to wrest this authority from the states for years.

The states consider local need and issues when evaluating a project.  Affected stakeholders are afforded due process to participate in the debate at the state level.  Occasionally, a state will deny an application for a transmission project that provides no benefit to the state.  The feds, and the investor owned utilities who relentlessly lobby them, want to remove consideration of new transmission projects to Washington, DC, where due process will be smothered by national policy goals. 

But it hasn't been smooth sailing for the feds.  Congress has repeatedly declined to federalize transmission permitting and siting, preferring to leave authority with the states.  But the feds and the utility lobbyists have found other ways to try to gain what they haven't been granted by Congress. 

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 hid a few little wormholes for the feds to override states and claim eminent domain to site transmission under certain conditions.  One was Section 1221, the creation of National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors and backstop siting authority for FERC to site transmission in these corridors in the event a state failed to act.  That section has been neutralized by the courts.

But, a second federal eminent domain tool that has not yet attracted much attention is about to be deployed through Section 1222, Third-Party Finance, in order to execute one of the worse abuses of federal eminent domain authority in history.  Section 1222 provides:
The Secretary, acting through WAPA or SWPA, or both, may design, develop, construct, operate, maintain, or own, or participate with other entities in designing, developing, constructing, operating, maintaining, or owning, a new electric power transmission facility and related facilities (“Project”) located within any State in which WAPA or SWPA operates if the Secretary, in consultation with the applicable Administrator, determines that the proposed Project--
(1)(A) is located in an area designated under section 216(a) of the Federal Power Act [16 U.S.C. 824p(a)] and will reduce congestion of electric transmission in interstate commerce; or
(B) is necessary to accommodate an actual or projected increase in demand for electric transmission capacity;
(2) is consistent with--
(A) transmission needs identified, in a transmission expansion plan or otherwise, by the appropriate Transmission Organization (as defined in the Federal Power Act [16 U.S.C. 791a et seq.]) if any, or approved regional reliability organization; and
(B) efficient and reliable operation of the transmission grid;
(3) will be operated in conformance with prudent utility practice;
(4) will be operated by, or in conformance with the rules of, the appropriate (A) Transmission Organization, if any, or (B) if such an organization does not exist, regional reliability organization; and
(5) will not duplicate the functions of existing transmission facilities or proposed facilities which are the subject of ongoing or approved siting and related permitting proceedings.
WAPA and SWPA are federal power marketing agencies set up to sell and deliver hydropower across central, western and southern states.  WAPA and SWPA, as federal agencies, are endowed with federal eminent domain authority to take private property for use in their systems.  Doesn't sound so bad, does it?  However, Section 1222 allows the Secretary of Energy to utilize WAPA's & SWPA's eminent domain authority for benefit of third-party projects in the agencies' territories that are not connected or necessary to their systems.  And this is where the slippery slope starts, friends.  Congress tried to prevent this kind of bad behavior by including qualifying standards for third-party projects, such as being approved in a regional transmission plan or equivalent, which would prevent duplication of projects, and requiring a finding of increased demand necessitating such a project.  Congress also put a cap on the amount of money WAPA and SWPA could accept from third parties.
(g) Maximum funding amount
The Secretary shall not accept and use more than $100,000,000 under subsection (c)(1) for the period encompassing fiscal years 2006 through 2015.
And Congress also stipulated that Section 1222 could not override existing state laws.
d) Relationship to other laws
Nothing in this section affects any requirement of--
(1) any Federal environmental law, including the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.);
(2) any Federal or State law relating to the siting of energy facilities; or
(3) any existing authorizing statutes.
But, personal relationships between DOE personnel and leadership of a private, for-profit corporation made things just so cozy that an RFP for Sec. 1222 projects was issued in 2010 that coincided with the development of this company's long-haul HVDC projects. 
Jimmy Glotfelty – Executive Vice President of Clean Line Energy Partners
Mr. Glotfelty brings a wealth of public and private sector transmission experience to Clean Line. He is a well-known expert in electric transmission and distribution, generation, energy policy and energy
security. He most recently held the position of Vice President, Energy Markets, for ICF Consulting. Mr. Glotfelty served in the US Department of Energy where he was the Founder and Director of the Office
of Electric Transmission and Distribution, a $100 million per year electricity transmission and distribution research and development program
. Mr. Glotfelty also was the lead US representative to
the joint US-Canadian Power System Outage Task Force investigating the Blackout of August 2003.
While at the Department of Energy, Mr. Glotfelty worked extensively with utility chief executive officers and senior management in the electric power and energy sectors. He led teams that focused on researching transmission and distribution technologies, gaining Presidential permits for cross-border transmission lines, studying the impacts of Regional Transmission  Organizations, identifying major transmission bottlenecks, and securing the critical energy infrastructure of the United States.
And the next thing you know, Clean Line Energy Partners became the first and only transmission developer to respond to DOE's RFP for third-party financed projects under Sec. 1222.  Clean Line submitted a voluminous application for its Plains & Eastern Clean Line merchant transmission project in July 2010.  In its application, Clean Line made it clear that its only interest in participating under Sec. 1222 was the ability to have SWPA condemn land for its project:
DOE and Southwestern understand and agree that their ability to acquire through condemnation proceedings property necessary for the development,  construction and operation of the Project is one of the primary reasons for Clean Line’s interest in developing the Project with DOE and Southwestern and through the use of EPAct 2005 section 1222.
DOE and Southwestern agree that, if the Secretary of Energy ultimately decides upon the conclusion of such evaluation as DOE and Southwestern deem appropriate that (i) the Project complies with section 1222, and (ii) to participate in the Project’s development pursuant to section 1222, then, DOE and Southwestern will use their condemnation authority as may be necessary and appropriate for the timely, cost-effective and commercially reasonable development, construction and operation of the Project.
Clean Line Energy Partners is a privately held company owned by Michael Zilkha and ZAM Ventures that is proposing to build four HVDC merchant transmission projects originating in the midwest.  A merchant transmission project is a for-profit venture that is paid for entirely by its owner.  In exchange for investing billions, Clean Line's super-rich owners will earn a hefty return on their capital by selling transmission capacity on the transmission lines to both generators and load serving entities.  Merchant transmission projects are speculative ventures that are proposed and built outside the regulated regional transmission planning process.  Merchant lines proposed outside a planning process have not been determined to be needed by anyone other than their owners.  If a transmission project is needed for reliability, economic or public policy reasons, it is approved by and included in the plan of a regional transmission operator.  A merchant transmission project is the wildcatter of the transmission business.

Without Section 1222 and SWPA's ability to take land for Clean Line via eminent domain, the company would have to apply for and receive public utility status and the power to condemn private property for its private gain from each individual state that it crosses.  This could prove onerous to the super-rich and muck up or delay their profit.

In exchange for stealing private property from citizens to be used for a private company's gain, SWPA could be granted a certain amount of transmission capacity on Clean Line's project, however, SWPA isn't in the wind business.  But DOE can use authority it was granted under Sec. 1222 to pick winners and losers in the renewable energy business, and Clean Line's investors put together a team with strong DOE connections.  Coincidence?  Probably not.

So, does Clean Line's project meet the requirements of Sec. 1222?

(1)(A) is located in an area designated under section 216(a) of the Federal Power Act [16 U.S.C. 824p(a)] and will reduce congestion of electric transmission in interstate commerce; or
(B) is necessary to accommodate an actual or projected increase in demand for electric transmission capacity;


Sec. 216(a) has been nullified by the courts, so (A) isn't even an option.  Here's Clean Line's justification for qualifying for (B) from their application: 

"In addition to the general demand for more transmission oriented to renewables, there is and will be a specific demand for transmission to address the following concerns:
Additional Transmission is Needed to Develop Wind Resources in the Southwest Power Pool;
Additional Transmission is Needed to Relieve Congestion in Western SPP;
Additional Export Capability is Needed from SPP; and
Additional Transmission is Needed to Import Power in the Southeast.
The Plains & Eastern Clean Line meets each of these needs."


No actual projected demand for the project from any official authority tasked with determining same was included.  The company points to bits and pieces of out-of-date studies that it feels justifies its desire to build this project, along with studies privately commissioned by the company.  I don't think this is the kind of "actual or projected increase in demand" that Congress had in mind.  It's pure posturing of the worst kind.

Other requirements stipulate that the project:

(2) is consistent with--
(A) transmission needs identified, in a transmission expansion plan or otherwise, by the appropriate Transmission Organization (as defined in the Federal Power Act [16 U.S.C. 791a et seq.]) if any, or approved regional reliability organization; and (5) will not duplicate the functions of existing transmission facilities or proposed facilities which are the subject of ongoing or approved siting and related permitting proceedings.


Clean Line's idea of compliance with this requirement?

"SPP repeatedly has identified the need to build additional transmission to fully develop wind potential in
the region and to export it to neighboring regions."
  Right, but SPP did not identify Clean Line as the solution in its transmission expansion plan, or otherwise determine its project was needed.

Clean Line also relies on:

"The Plains & Eastern Clean Line is consistent with transmission needs identified in the Joint Coordinated
System Plan 2008 (JCSP). The JCSP was the first inter-regional transmission planning effort in the
Eastern Interconnection. The JCSP was a collaborative effort and involved most of the major
transmission operators in the Eastern Interconnection, including, MISO, SPP, PJM Interconnection, TVA,
Mid-Continent Area Power Pool and several key members of SERC."


And this 5 year old plan has been scrapped.  Also not what Congress had in mind for this requirement.

When DOE questioned Clean Line's eligibility under Sec. 1222, the company submitted an "updated application" that contained the same old lack of convincing evidence of qualification.

Nevertheless, DOE issued a letter entering into an agreement with Clean Line to move forward with the NEPA process.  DOE has not completely committed to the project yet, but if it does:

  • Clean Line will agree that eminent domain authority would be used only as a last resort after negotiations in good faith have concluded with all affected landowners;
  • Clean Line will agree that the Department will retain the option to select and oversee any land acquisition company required for the Project.
In that case, DOE needs to take a look at the complete and utter mess Clean Line has made out of the public information and land acquisition process.  Clean Line's idea of good faith negotiations with landowners, according to its updated application, put landowner notification last.  Clean Line makes much of meeting with "stakeholders" such as environmental organizations, state agencies, state legislators, members of the governors’ teams, and federal congressional delegations.  But only after all these entities, who are not personally affected and will not have to live with a Clean Line in their own backyard, have drunk the Clean Line Koolaid, does Clean Line consult with landowners:

"After the workshops, Clean Line will host public
open houses to gather feedback on the preferred and alternative routes from landowners and other
affected parties. These outreach efforts are designed to assure that relevant stakeholders have early and multiple opportunities to provide feedback..." 
except for landowners.  Landowners are not considered "relevant stakeholders" by Clean Line.

DOE should think long and hard about making the federal government liable for the legal mistakes of a private company.  Just because the feds were successful in asserting federal eminent domain in another dissimilar situation, does not mean that helping the rich get even richer at the expense of the common man is a good idea.  How much money does Congress have budgeted for another federal court beatdown over eminent domain takings?

And DOE needs to take a good, hard, objective look at Clean Line's "qualifications" under Sec. 1222.  The company doesn't qualify without torturing the language in the statute, and a finding that it does qualify is also likely to lead to a separate, but equally vicious, court showdown.

Sometimes, it's just not worth the risk to help your "friends" by overstepping your legal authority and bending federal law.  Maybe the incoming Energy Secretary needs to do a little housekeeping before Congress does it for him, or he finds himself explaining DOE's taking of ordinary citizens' private property for use by super-rich investors.  Congress has resolutely rejected federal transmission siting authority over and over again and will likely continue to do so.

20 Comments

How To Talk Like a Toolbag

4/9/2013

6 Comments

 
Today we're going to learn how to talk like a toolbag.  Our friends at "Mon Power" (really FirstEnergy) have been so kind as to demonstrate the art of toolbaggery for our edification.

The word "spend" is a verb.  It means to pay out (money) in buying or hiring goods or services : the firm will spend $100,000 on hardware and software.

Only a toolbag who thinks he sounds cool uses "spend" as a noun : Mon Power Spend of $60 Million in 2013 Designed to Enhance Electric System and Reliability.

Since FirstEnergy's "news" was so boring, perhaps one of their toolbags thought he was spicing it up (and I say "he" because only men talk like toolbags) by using such a cool noun as "spend."  That makes it all better, right?

Wrong.  When Mon Power customers see the word "spend," they immediately associate it with the word "pay" :  Mon Power spends, customers pay.  Customers don't like to pay.  It annoys them.

For the edification of the FirstEnergy toolbag responsible for this, a better word might have been "invest" : Mon Power Invests $60 Million to Enhance Electric System Reliability in 2013.  Don't let me catch you using stupid words like "spend" again, okay?  Next lesson won't be free, like this one.

And while we're at it, there's really nothing newsworthy about FirstEnergy performing routine maintenance and upgrades, no matter how much they spend doing their job.  Let's just say the public was underwhelmed by FirstEnergy's "news."

In fact, one West Virginia consumer was so unimpressed with FirstEnergy's "news" that she remarked, "Awesome!  I'm glad they're so focused on improving reliability while concocting a plan that would have their customers getting 90% of their electricity from 2 forty-year-old coal plants!"

Another immediately made a resolution to send out a press release every time he brushes his teeth from now on, because his own personal, routine maintenance is about as newsworthy as FirstEnergy performing routine maintenance on its own system.

And another just found herself laughing hysterically at the "news." 
6 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>

    About the Author

    Keryn Newman blogs here at StopPATH WV about energy issues, transmission policy, misguided regulation, our greedy energy companies and their corporate spin.
    In 2008, AEP & Allegheny Energy's PATH joint venture used their transmission line routing etch-a-sketch to draw a 765kV line across the street from her house. Oooops! And the rest is history.

    About
    StopPATH Blog

    StopPATH Blog began as a forum for information and opinion about the PATH transmission project.  The PATH project was abandoned in 2012, however, this blog was not.

    StopPATH Blog continues to bring you energy policy news and opinion from a consumer's point of view.  If it's sometimes snarky and oftentimes irreverent, just remember that the truth isn't pretty.  People come here because they want the truth, instead of the usual dreadful lies this industry continues to tell itself.  If you keep reading, I'll keep writing.


    Need help opposing unneeded transmission?
    Email me


    Search This Site

    Got something to say?  Submit your own opinion for publication.

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    August 2025
    July 2025
    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010

    Categories

    All
    $$$$$$
    2023 PJM Transmission
    Aep Vs Firstenergy
    Arkansas
    Best Practices
    Best Practices
    Big Winds Big Lie
    Can Of Worms
    Carolinas
    Citizen Action
    Colorado
    Corporate Propaganda
    Data Centers
    Democracy Failures
    DOE Failure
    Emf
    Eminent Domain
    Events
    Ferc Action
    FERC Incentives Part Deux
    Ferc Transmission Noi
    Firstenergy Failure
    Good Ideas
    Illinois
    Iowa
    Kansas
    Land Agents
    Legislative Action
    Marketing To Mayberry
    MARL
    Missouri
    Mtstorm Doubs Rebuild
    Mtstormdoubs Rebuild
    New Jersey
    New Mexico
    Newslinks
    NIETC
    Opinion
    Path Alternatives
    Path Failures
    Path Intimidation Attempts
    Pay To Play
    Potomac Edison Investigation
    Power Company Propaganda
    Psc Failure
    Rates
    Regulatory Capture
    Skelly Fail
    The Pjm Cartel
    Top Ten Clean Line Mistakes
    Transource
    Valley Link Transmission
    Washington
    West Virginia
    Wind Catcher
    Wisconsin

Copyright 2010 StopPATH WV, Inc.